Effects of 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami on Mainland India

Effects of the December 2004 Indian
Ocean Tsunami on the Indian Mainland
Alpa Sheth,a…
Snigdha Sanyal,b…
Arvind Jaiswal,c…
and Prathibha Gandhid…
The 26 December 2004 tsunami significantly affected the coastal regions
of southern peninsular India. About 8,835 human lives were lost in the tsunami
in mainland India, with 86 persons reported missing. Two reconnaissance
teams traveled by road to survey the damage across mainland India.
Geographic and topological features affecting tsunami behavior on the
mainland were observed. The housing stock along the coast, as well as bridges
and roads, suffered extensive damage. Structures were damaged by direct
pressure from tsunami waves, and scouring damage was induced by the
receding waves. Many of the affected structures consisted of nonengineered,
poorly constructed houses belonging to the fishing community.
关DOI: 10.1193/1.2208562兴
MAINLAND AREAS SURVEYED
The Great Sumatra earthquake of 26 December 2004 did not cause shaking-induced
damage to the mainland of India, but the consequent Indian Ocean tsunami had a sig-
nificant effect on the southern peninsular region of India 共Jain et al. 2005兲. The tsunami
severely affected the coastal regions of the eastern state of Tamil Nadu, the union terri-
tory of Pondicherry, and the western state of Kerala. Two reconnaissance teams under-
took road trips to survey the damage across mainland India. One team traveled from the
Ernakulam district in Kerala, then continued south along the west coast to the southern-
most tip of mainland India 共Kanyakumari兲 and up along the east coast to Tuticorin. The
coastal journey was then resumed from Nagapattinam, moved northward, and concluded
at Chennai. The second team traveled from Vishakhapatnam in Andhra Pradesh along
the coast down to Chennai 共Figure 1兲. This paper is based on observations made during
these trips.
SEISMICITY OF THE REGION
The southern peninsular region comprising Kerala and part of Tamil Nadu on the
west coast and the rest of Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, and Pondicherry on the east
coast is a region of low-to-moderate seismicity. The area lies in the Stable Continental
Region, which is not believed to be exposed to the hazard of strong earthquakes. The
strongest known earthquake in the region 共M=6.0兲 occurred on 8 February 1900 near
Coimbatore and had a maximum intensity of VII. There was an earthquake of magnitude
a兲
Vakil Mehta Sheth Consulting Engineers, Mumbai, India; E-mail: alpa_sheth@vakilmehtasheth.com
b兲
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur, India
c兲
EON Designers Consulting Engineers, Secunderabad, India
d兲
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India
S435
Earthquake Spectra, Volume 22, No. S3, pages S435–S473, June 2006; © 2006, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute

M=5.8 on 31 March 1843 in Bhadrachalam, Andhra Pradesh. Earthquakes of magnitude
M=5.5 共1959兲 and M=5.2 共1967兲 occurred at Ongole, Andhra Pradesh. Figures 2 and 3
indicate the broad shield sources and tectonic features of the peninsular shield of India
共Rao 1970, Reddy 2004兲.
In the last decade, the area has experienced earthquakes of magnitude 5.0 and lower.
The most recent significant earthquakes were M=5.0 共2000兲 and M=4.8 共2001兲, both of
which occurred in the same area south of Idukki in central Kerala.
TSUNAMI HISTORY
Prior to 26 December 2004, there was no known record of tsunamis on the southwest
coast of India. The west coast experienced a tsunami due to the M=8.1 earthquake of 27
November 1945 with an epicenter 100 km from Karachi, Pakistan, but the effects were
felt only up to Karwar, 250 km north of the Kerala border. The southeast coast, however,
has experienced tsunamis earlier. The earliest record dates back to 31 December 1881,
when a tsunami 1 m high was recorded in Chennai. It was caused by an earthquake of
M=7.9 below Car Nicobar Island. The August 1883 eruption of the Krakatoa volcano in
Indonesia caused 2-m-high tsunami waves in Chennai. On 26 June 1941, an M=8.1
earthquake occurred in the Andaman archipelago, which triggered a tsunami of about
Figure 1. Reconnaissance team survey routes covering the mainland. 共Map courtesy of
C. V. R. Murty兲
S436 A. SHETH, S. SANYAL, A. JAISWAL, AND P. GANDHI

1 m in the city of Chennai. While some scientists have estimated deaths of over 3,000
people along the east coast of India in the 1941 tsunami, there are no reliable data on the
number of deaths, if any, due to that tsunami 共Murty and Rafiq 1991, Bilham 2005兲.
GEOLOGY OF COASTAL MAINLAND INDIA
The structure of peninsular India is complex because of the varied geology, faults,
and fractures. More than a third of this area is covered by basaltic flows called the Dec-
can Trap. The thickness is 2–3 km on the west coast and decreases toward the east. The
rest of the peninsula is covered by Precambrian rocks and sedimentation formation of
later eras 共Figures 2 and 3, Gupta 2005兲.
The soil along the west coast of Kerala and Tamil Nadu is primarily sandy, underlain
by soft clay layers. Further south, away from the coastline, the land slopes steeply up-
ward and is rocky. The coastal strip of southwest Tamil Nadu is rich in minerals. There
Figure 2. Tentative broad shield sources in the peninsular shield for India 共source: I. Gupta兲.
EFFECTS OF THE DECEMBER 2004 INDIAN OCEAN TSUNAMI ON THE INDIAN MAINLAND S437

has been significant dredging in the mineral-rich Kanyakumari coast, and this has led to
a change in the topology of the area by flattening some areas and making them more
vulnerable to a tsunami.
The east coast has rich alluvial soil in the river deltas and along the coast. The other
predominant soils in this region are clay, loam, and red laterite. Along the Andhra
Pradesh coast, the soil is also rich alluvial with rocky outcrops but, in certain pockets of
the delta areas of Godavari, the soil is deep friable, well-drained sandy loam.
WAVE ARRIVAL TIME
The tsunami waves arrived first on the east coast. Details of the tide gauge levels at
the ports of Kochi, Tuticorin, Chennai, and Vishakhapatnam are shown in Figures 4–7
Figure 3. Major evolutionary units and associated tectonic features in peninsular India 共source:
I. Gupta兲.

共NIO 2005兲, respectively. As can be seen from the tide gauge data, the tsunami waves
first reached Kochi at 11:10 A.M., Tuticorin at 9:57 A.M., and Chennai and Vishakhap-
atnam at 9:05 A.M. 共all Indian Standard Time兲.
Most locations experienced 3–5 waves, details of which are described elsewhere in
this paper.
GENERAL FEATURES OF TSUNAMI EFFECTS
The tsunami effects varied greatly across different parts of the coast according to the
number of waves experienced, inundation distance and height of the waves, and density
of the area—as well as topological and geographical features that made some areas more
vulnerable than others 共Table 1兲. The number of lives lost was also influenced by the
proximity of habitats to the coastline, exposure to previous disasters, and the local di-
saster management capability. These are discussed in detail in this paper. The affected
areas are discussed in three parts, which are based on their geography:
Figure 4. Tide gauge data for Kochi Port 共source: NIO兲.

• Southwest coast: this comprises Kerala, which suffered significant damage that im-
pacted the largest number of people of any affected state but suffered relatively lower
loss of life, and the Kanyakumari district of Tamil Nadu, which suffered heavy loss
of life due, to a large extent, to human-created local topographical features.
• Southeast coast: this comprises the rich alluvial delta region of the Tamil Nadu coast
and Pondicherry, which experienced maximum wave heights and recorded the maxi-
mum loss of life and damage in mainland India.
• East coast: this comprises Andhra Pradesh, which suffered marginal damage and loss
of life.
Figure 5. Tide gauge data for Tuticorin Port 共source: NIO兲.

GEOGRAPHIC AND TOPOLOGICAL FEATURES AFFECTING TSUNAMI
BEHAVIOR ON THE MAINLAND
SOUTHWEST COAST OF MAINLAND INDIA
Kerala
The state of Kerala experienced tsunami-related damage in three southern districts,
Ernakulam, Allapuzha, and Kollam 共Table 2兲, due to the diffraction of the waves around
Sri Lanka 共Murty 2005兲. The southernmost district of Thiruvananthpuram, however, es-
caped damage. This was possibly due to the wide turn of the diffracted waves at the pen-
insular tip, thereby missing Thiruvananthpuram.
The coast of Kerala is relatively flat and practically at sea level. Throughout the
coastal areas of Kerala, and especially in the affected districts, are long stretches of
lakes, lagoons, and ponds connected by a network of canals called “backwaters” 共kay-
als兲. The backwater routes date from centuries ago and have long been used for all trans-
Figure 6. Tide gauge data for Chennai Port 共source: NIO兲.

portation needs, in particular for trade in coconut, rubber, rice, and spices. Today, these
waterways link remote villages and islands to the mainland.
Major damage in Kerala occurred in two narrow strips of land bound on the west by
the Arabian Sea and on the east by a network of backwaters.
Ernakulam District
The northern strip comprises the island of Wypeen north of the city of Kochi in the
Ernakulam district. It is about 20 km long and has a maximum width of about 3 km.
Edavanakkad is a prominent fishing village in Wypeen Island that suffered maximum
damage. Fifty houses were completely destroyed 共Figure 8兲, and 350 houses were dam-
aged in this village, which lost 5 lives. The coast in this area had a seawall along most
parts, with openings in the seawall for the passage of boats. Damage due to the tsunami
was more intense in the areas that were not protected by the seawall. At Edavanakkad,
the seawall was about 100 m from the shoreline and was made of random loose rubble
Figure 7. Tide gauge data for Vishakhapatnam Port 共source: NIO兲.

Table 1. Tsunami effects in mainland India 共source: Ministry of Home Affairs兲
State or
union
territory
Coastal
length
affected
共km兲
Water
penetra-
tion into
mainland
共km兲
Average
height of
tsunami wave*
共m兲
Max.
runup
height
共m兲
Human lives lost,
per district
Number of
villages
affected
Population
affected
共millions兲
Dwelling
units lost
or damaged
Kerala 250 0.5−1.5 3−5 3.4 131 Kollam
35 Allapuzha
5 Ernakulam
187 1.3 17,381
Tamil Nadu
共west coast兲
100 0.2–2.0 3–10 4.5 824 Kanyakumari 376 0.9 128,394
Tamil Nadu
共east coast兲
800 0.4–1.5 2–10 5 6,051 Nagapattinam
612 Cuddalore
128 Kancheepuram
206 Chennai
144 Other
Pondicherry 25 0.2–2 5–10
共max. at
Karaikal兲
4 484 Karaikal
107 Pondicherry
33 0.04 10,061
Andhra
Pradesh
985 0.2–1.0 4 2.2 27 Krishna
20 Nellore
35 Prakasham
23 Other
301 0.2 1,557
*
Based on survivors’ estimates
EFFECTS
OF
THE
DECEMBER
2004
INDIAN
OCEAN
TSUNAMI
ON
THE
INDIAN
MAINLAND
S443

masonry comprising large boulders, some of which were displaced by the tsunami. The
houses in Edavanakkad were built about 15 m from the seawall. The plinth height was
about 0.6 m from mean sea level.
Allapuzha and Kollam Districts
The other strip most affected in Kerala is a shoestring isthmus south of the city of
Allapuzha about 40 km long and extending from Trikunnapuzha in the Allapuzha dis-
trict to Karunagapalli in the Kollam district. The strip has a maximum width of less than
1 km and is bound by the open coast on the west and Kayanakulam Lake and backwa-
ters on the east. A small opening in the strip connects the lake to the sea. The width of
the land strip is less than 0.5 km at many places. As a result, the tsunami waves lashed
over the entire strip of land, traveled across the backwaters, and rolled onto the opposite
bank.
Two areas that bore the brunt of the tsunami in the region were Arattupuzha in the
Allapuzha district and the Alappad panchayat in the Kollam district 共Figures 9 and 10兲.
These areas are the gatekeepers of the opening where the lake disgorges into the sea. The
villages are densely populated 共with a density of 2,652 per km2
, versus the state average
of 762 per km2
兲 on both sides of the coastal road that barely separates the lake from the
sea. The isthmus has no intermediate bridge connection to the mainland and is con-
nected to it only at the two ends. The area thus has to depend on boats for safe exit in
times of emergency. The largest number of casualties 共130兲 in Kerala was reported from
the densely populated Alappad panchayat 共including the villages of Cheriya Azhikkal
and Azhikkal兲. In the village of Arattupuzha in the Allapuzha district, the death toll was
28. The seawall, where it existed, was dislodged and did not exist in many places along
Table 2. Characteristics of tsunami waves in Kerala
District
No. of
waves
Arrival time
of waves
Wave
height
共m兲
Wave
travel
distance
共m兲
Inunda-
tion
height
共m兲
Special
features
Recession of
water
Ernakulam 3 First wave at
11:10 A.M.,
second wave at
1:30 P.M.,
third wave at
1:45 P.M.
⬎4 ⬃1,000 2.4 Water level
rose from
10:30 A.M.
Water receded
about 150 m into
sea after first wave;
when water re-
ceded, it took a lot
of sand and
scoured roads.
Allapuzha
and Kollam
3 First wave at
11:30 A.M.,
second wave at
1:40 P.M.,
third wave at
1:45 P.M.
⬎4 ⬎1,000 3 — Water receded
⬃500 m before first
wave.

the north Kollam coast. A wave height of 4 m was reported by the survivors.
The area has a history of floods that occur during the monsoon, especially when
heavy rains coincide with high tide. The villagers are thus well trained in quick and safe
evacuations, but there was simply no time for evacuation in these densely populated vil-
lages when the tsunami arrived. There was, however, no loss of life in villages such as
Walia Azhikkal, where rapid evacuation was carried out successfully. After observations
of abnormal behavior of the sea, the Kerala police had sounded an alert at 11:30 A.M. to
warn people, but it was too late for some villages. The tsunami struck almost immedi-
ately afterward.
Tamil Nadu
Kanyakumari forms the southwest district of Tamil Nadu. Unlike the Kerala coast,
the Tamil Nadu west coast has flat land at sea level along the north coast in some areas
such as Kolachel, where the soil is rich alluvium, but in other areas and further south,
the land is mountainous. It slopes steeply upward from the coastline and is rocky. This
Figure 8. Damaged house in Edavanakkad 共photo: A. Sheth兲.

was observed at Muttom Beach and at the tip of Kanyakumari. On some beaches such as
Sothavilai, there are sand dune formations. Table 3 summarizes the tsunami wave char-
acteristics in Tamil Nadu.
Kanyakumari District
One of the most affected areas in the district was Kolachel and the surrounding vil-
lages, located 30 km west of Nagercoil, which is the capital of the Kanyakumari district.
The land near the coast is flat and is at sea level, and no seawall was visible. Water trav-
eled inland by more than 300 m. New streams and estuaries were carved out by incom-
ing waves 共Figure 11兲. When the waves receded, they deepened these features further by
scouring. The town and neighboring villages recorded more than 500 fatalities, of which
more than 50% were children. The wave height was reported to be 5 m, and the runup
height was 2.6 m 共Figure 12兲. A large number of deaths were triggered by the human-
created topology of this town. Harbour Road, which experienced the maximum number
of casualties, had a long, open, dry channel called the Ananda Victoria Marthandam
共AVM兲 Canal 共Figure 13兲. This canal is more than 2.5 m deep and 6 m wide, running
parallel to the shore. The canal was meant to bring in fresh water but was not in use.
Besides this canal, there were numerous open trenches laid parallel to each other 共Figure
14兲 that catered to the special needs of the coir-making industry, which is the main
means of livelihood in this region besides fishing. These trenches were about 1.5–2 m
deep, 15 m long, and 4 m wide. They were used to soak the coconuts and separate the
Figure 9. Scouring in Allapuzha—houses were 4–15 m from the shoreline 共photo: A. Sheth兲.

husk for making coir. When the tsunami waves surged into the town, the AVM canal and
these trenches became death traps. More than 300 bodies were recovered from the slush
of the trenches and channel. The masonry retaining wall of the jetty at Kolachel was
badly damaged.
A few kilometers from Kolachel is Muttom Beach, a popular tourist spot in Tamil
Nadu often used as a romantic backdrop by the bustling Tamil film industry. This area
did not suffer damage, because it is more than 50 m above mean sea level. A few tourists
who had gone down to the sea to watch the tsunami were washed away in the wave at
10:30 A.M.
The Mannakudi panchayat near Kolachel was a cluster of villages, including Mela-
manakudi, which was badly affected. A 160-m-long bridge had been commissioned in
Figure 10. Destruction in the Allapad panchayat—a concrete block house with a reinforced
concrete 共RC兲 roof 共photo: A. Sheth兲.

2002 to connect the villages of Melamanakudi and Kelamanakudi on opposite banks of
the Pazhyar River. The bridge went missing after the tsunami 共Figure 15兲. It was origi-
nally built with four spans, all of which were washed away by the tsunami. The two end
spans traveled upstream by 100 m and were beached on the banks; the central spans
were not visible, apparently having sunk into the waters. The substructure appeared to be
intact except at the apron. There were no restraints between the superstructure and the
foundation. Melamanakudi is a prosperous and picturesque hilly village built on the wa-
terfront. A road from the village of Palam to Melamanakudi was reportedly built by lev-
eling the sand dunes in the region, in violation of the coastal regulation zone 共CRZ兲
rules. Numerous houses were built on the seashore not more than 50 m from the shore-
line, apparently after the leveling of sand dunes. These houses suffered complete devas-
tation 共Figure 16兲. Structures 250 m from the shoreline suffered little or no damage, be-
cause the land sloped upward. About 150 people died at Melamanakudi.
Sothavilai has a beautiful beach and was being actively developed by the state for
tourism. The beach slopes upward from the shoreline and folds into sand dunes about
8–10 m high along parts of the beach. A beach resort has been constructed inland be-
yond the sand dunes. Numerous tea shops and other food stalls lined the path leading to
the beach. The tsunami waves lashed and made their way over the ridges of these dunes
and beyond them through the numerous small drainage channels running into the sea
from the town, causing loss of life and much scouring while receding. An estimated 200
people, mainly stall owners and visitors, died at this beach.
Table 3. Characteristics of tsunami waves in Tamil Nadu
District
Num-
ber of
waves Arrival time of waves
Wave
height
共m兲
Wave travel
distance 共m兲
Runup
height
共m兲
Water condition
before/after tsu-
nami
Kanyakumari 3 First wave⬃10:30 A.M.
and second and third
wave at 15-min. inter-
vals after first
4–10 ⬃200–400 2.4 Water receded
about 1 km before
first wave in areas
such as Sottavellai
Nagapattinam 5 First wave at 9:00
A.M.; five waves
within 1-hr span
⬃10 100–1,000 5
Cuddalore 3 First wave at 8 A.M.
and subsequent waves
at 10–15-min. intervals
⬃9 250 4
Kancheepuram 3 First wave at 9:15 A.M. ⬃4 ⬃1,000 2
Chennai 5 First wave at 9:05 A.M.
and fifth at 11 A.M.
- 200 2

The southernmost tip of mainland India, Kanyakumari, experienced tsunami waves
that were over 4.5 m high. Because Kanyakumari is on high land, the damage was
limited—street furniture and compound walls were destroyed. About 1,200 people
stranded at the rock memorial were successfully evacuated a few hours after the tsunami.
SOUTHEAST COAST OF TAMIL NADU AND PONDICHERRY
The southeastern coastline of Tamil Nadu is 800 km long. It comprises the Coro-
mandel Coast in the north and the Fisheries Coast in the south. The coast north of Point
Calimere up to Pondicherry is practically straight 共⬃79.5 °E兲 and directly across from
Figure 11. The tsunami carved new waterways—a soak pit was exposed by tsunami waves in
Kolachel 共photo: A. Sheth兲.

the Andaman and Nicobar Islands at a distance of 1,900 km. This region was the most
affected by the tsunami. It comprises the coastal districts of Nagapattinam, Cuddalore,
Villipuram, Kanchipuram, and Chennai.
The arrival of the first tsunami wave along the east coast coincided with high tide,
which amplified its effect, as seen in Figure 6. The coastline in this region is flat except
for gentle slopes. From local residents, it was inferred that the beaches previously had a
steeper slope than is now visible. Many of the slopes and much of the vegetation have
been cut during the last two decades to make way for coastal hamlets.
The coastal districts of Tirunelveli, Tuticorin, Ramanathapuram, and Pudukkotai—
which were in the shadow zone of Sri Lanka—suffered relatively minor effects from tsu-
nami waves. The tide gauge at Tuticorin Port, for example, measured a wave height of
1.8 m, which was only marginally higher than high-tide levels, partly because the tsu-
nami waves were out of phase with the high tide here 共Figure 5兲.
Nagapattinam District
Nagapattinam was the most affected district, not just in Tamil Nadu but in the entire
mainland of India, with 6,051 fatalities reported. Some social factors added to the vul-
nerability of the region.
Velankanni
The town of Velankanni, 12 km from Nagapattinam, houses the Church of Mary of
Figure 12. The runup height at Kolachel Beach was 2.6 m, as shown by the watermarks 共photo:
A. Sheth兲.

Figure 13. The AVM channel in Kolachel, which became a death trap; more than 300 bodies
were found in the slush of the AVM channel and open trenches 共photo: A. Sheth兲.
Figure 14. Open trenches for making coir. As with the AVM channel, these trenches also be-
came death traps 共photo: A. Sheth兲.

Good Health and is a very popular pilgrimage center among believers for its healing
powers. The central axis of the church is aligned with the main road leading to the beach
共Figure 17兲. Thousands of worshippers had thronged to this town for Christmas, and
many of them were at the beach on the morning of 26 December after attending Mass.
More than 2,000 people died in this town. A tsunami wave approximately 5 m high first
struck the shore at 9:20 A.M., followed by four more waves between 9:20 A.M. and 10
A.M. The waves crashed onto the shore and continued on their rampage along the main
road leading to the town. Though the water did not enter the church, it gushed up to the
bus stand, inundating several shops and houses. A large number of bodies were found
along this road. The inundation distance was more than 1,000 m.
Seruthur
In the adjacent coastal village of Seruthur, which lost 131 people, the wave height
was the same as in Velankanni. The number of deaths was lower because of much lower
population density, but also because the plinth of the houses in this village was 1.5 m
above ground level, and the elevation of the ground was 1.5 m from sea level. The runup
height was 2 m above the plinth level, or 5 m above mean sea level 共Figure 18兲.
Akkaraipettai
Akkaraipettai is an important and prosperous fishing port in the Nagapattinam dis-
trict. About 1,000 boats and fishing trawlers were destroyed in this town.
Figure 15. All spans of the Melamanakudi Bridge came off their bearings. The end spans
drifted upstream, while the middle spans sank into the river 共photo: A. Sheth兲.

On Ariyanattu Street, a communications tower 共Figure 19兲 and control room 共Figure
20兲 had toppled, while in adjacent Naliyanthottam, a godown 共warehouse兲 storing gas
cylinders was destroyed, with all cylinders being swept away by the tsunami. The
godown was more than 800 m from the shoreline.
Nagore
No damage was reported at the oil jetty at Chennai Petrol Chemicals Ltd. at Nagore,
primarily because of the high elevation, more than 3 m from sea level. However, 1,200
houses were destroyed or damaged. Water entered almost 1,000 m inland. The rail link
to Nagore, a pilgrim town, was cut off as a 7-km meter-gauge track between Nagapat-
tinam and Nagore was completely damaged 共Figure 21兲.
Cuddalore District
The Cuddalore district borders Nagapattinam in the north and was the second-most-
affected district.
Silver Beach
Silver Beach had been recently developed for tourism and recreation activities, such
as boating and a small amusement park. Two rivers discharge into the sea at this scenic
location. The shore is at sea level. The first tsunami wave arrived at 8:35 A.M., with two
subsequent waves within the next 15 minutes. The waves threw boats upstream into the
Figure 16. Some homes at Melamanakudi were within 6 m of the shoreline. This photo shows
a fallen RC roof slab 共photo: A. Sheth兲.

Figure 17. Velankanni—maximum loss of life along the road from the beach leading to the
church 共source: www.vailankannichurch.org兲.
Figure 18. Houses in Seruthur, the village neighboring Velankanni, were not significantly af-
fected, due to a higher plinth 共photo: A. Sheth兲.

rivers and subsequently onto the shores. The waves destroyed most of the small struc-
tures built on the beach, such as a police booth, a boat house, water tanks, and electricity
poles. The newly built road was washed away completely 共Figure 22兲, as was the new
Neyveli Lignite Corporation 共NLC兲 amusement park. The road had been built after
Figure 19. Damaged communication tower on Ariyanattu Street 共photo: A. Sheth兲.
Figure 20. Toppled control room on Ariyanattu Street 共photo: A. Sheth兲.

clearing away mangroves. The water remained about 0.6 m above mean sea level for
four days after the tsunami. On the beach, 37 people died. Bodies of victims were found
in fishing nets, mangrove bushes, and in low-level areas. The bodies were covered with
sand deposited by the waves. Adjacent thatched houses of a village less than 1 km from
the shore were not damaged. Survivors reported a wave height of 6 m.
Devanampattinam
This is a coastal fishing village not far from Silver Beach, built barely 50 m from the
shoreline at sea level. Unsurprisingly, houses were significantly damaged 共Figure 23兲.
Figure 21. Damaged railway line between Nagore and Nagapattinam 共photo: A. Sheth兲.

Talanguda
In the coastal village of Talanguda, houses were also built about 50 m from the
shoreline, but, because of a tree grove between the sea and the houses, the damage was
Figure 22. Tsunami waves washed away the newly built roads at Silver Beach, Cuddalore
共photo: A. Sheth兲.
Figure 23. Houses in Devanampattinam were barely 50 m from the shoreline 共photo: A. Sheth兲.

in some measure contained, even though the tsunami waves were said to be more fero-
cious here than at Devanampattinam. The gable walls of most thatch houses had suffered
major damage or had collapsed. The waves had lashed the boats across the beach, and
some boats had crashed against houses from the gaps between trees. However, not a
single nonengineered structure with a concrete roof was affected.
Singarathop
Singarathop was a fishing village with a flowing river. A new bridge connects the
town of Cuddalore to Singarathoppu. The tsunami, coupled with the high tide level of
the river, caused a severe rise in water level, and the whole town was submerged. The
recently constructed bridge had a very high elevation, and residents rushed to this
bridge, thus saving their lives 共Figure 24兲.
Kancheepuram District
The Kancheepuram district has special significance because of the presence of the
nuclear power plant at Kalpakkam. The plant area was not affected by the tsunami; how-
ever, the housing colony 共DAE township兲 was very badly affected. Almost 1,000 houses
were damaged, and a seawall 2 m high and 4 km long collapsed. The waves rushed into
the colony, with a runup height of about 1.5 m. Almost all courtyard walls of the houses
for 1 km collapsed. There was almost no vegetation near the shore. A new estuary was
formed. A school’s compound wall was damaged, and electric poles were uprooted near
the school grounds. The tsunami waves deposited a large quantity of sand near a pedes-
trian bridge. Water pipelines along the bridge were thrown off the bridge.
Figure 24. At Singarathop, the bridge from which this photo was taken is much higher than the
town and served as a refuge 共photo: A. Sheth兲.

A foundation of 100⫻100 m for a 500-MW fast breeder reactor was being con-
structed about 500 m from the sea. The foundation’s pit, which was 20 m deep, was in-
undated by 6 m. From an observation post, a vigilant project officer had seen the tsu-
nami wave striking the compound wall and warned the 180 people in the pit to
immediately evacuate; as a result, there were no casualties. Also, the people had enough
time to escape because of the time required for the water to fill the foundation pit 共Fig-
ure 25兲.
Chennai
At about 13 km in length, Marina Beach in Chennai is the second-longest beach in
the world. Numerous stately structures facing Marina Beach were built in colonial times.
The tsunami battered Marina Beach, and giant waves swept across the beach and the
wide Kamarjar Salai road and entered into these buildings. However, there was no sig-
nificant damage to the buildings. The waves caught many morning walkers on Marina
Beach unawares. Approximately 160 people died on the beach in the tsunami. The ham-
let adjacent to the beach consisted of thatch shanties less than 50 m from the sea. These
were ravaged in the tsunami. The fishing port of Chennai suffered significant damage,
and approximately 150 fishermen were reported dead. However, the main port of Chen-
nai, which has a seawall, was not significantly damaged. The mooring line of one of the
ships, the Keshava, broke off and collided with two other ships, causing localized dam-
age to the ships. Mooring dolphins were damaged.
Figure 25. The foundation pit of this 500-MW reactor was inundated by 6 m of water 共photo:
P. Gandhi兲.

Pondicherry
Pondicherry was a French colony until 1954, when it was integrated as a union ter-
ritory into the Indian Republic. Pondicherry recorded 599 deaths 共Government of
Pondicherry 2005兲. The damage was in two regions of Pondicherry—Karaikal and the
city of Pondicherry.
Karaikal
The city of Karaikal was a French colony until 1954. It is tucked into the Nagapat-
tinam district of Tamil Nadu and is flat, devoid of forests or hills. It has a beautiful, nor-
mally serene shore with the Arasalar River running across the city and discharging into
the sea at Karaikal. The first tsunami wave struck the city at 8:45 A.M. and was followed
by two more waves. The city lost 265 lives in the tsunami 共492 lives were lost in the
region, including the neighboring villages兲. The coast has a promenade at the mouth of
the river, and at the end of the promenade is a club with recreational facilities 共Figure
26兲. Along the promenade, a wall about 2.4 m high collapsed.
Arasalar Bridge connects the north and south of Karaikal. Tsunami waves traveled
through the Arasalar River about 500 m beyond the bridge into the mainland. In essence,
water went inland 2.5 km from the shoreline. A pier gave way, causing the collapse of
two adjacent arches of the bridge, but the Indian Army put up a temporary Bailey bridge
in under six hours. This Bailey bridge was further extended across the entire bridge 共Fig-
ure 27兲. A helipad washed away on the south side of a backwater, along with a wooden
army jetty. The wave height, according to eyewitness accounts, was about 10 m and was
the color of black mud. The runup height was 2.4 m.
Figure 26. The beachfront club at Karaikal was badly damaged 共photo: A. Sheth兲.

The high tide along with the tsunami waves made matters worse, and all structures
and bodies were pushed southward. Children were caught in the mangroves. Across the
river, on the south bank was a rich settlement of 50 families of a fishing community
called Karukalacheri, where 25 people died; Karukalacheri is also called kutty Singapore
共“kutty” means “little”兲. Most of the houses were destroyed or badly damaged.
Pondicherry City
The city of Pondicherry lies north of the Cuddalore district. Although 107 bodies
were recovered from Pondicherry and the surrounding hamlets, 56 of these bodies had
been washed away from Tamil Nadu.
The city experienced waves about 9 m high but escaped relatively unscathed due to
the stone seawall constructed almost three centuries ago and fortified over time. The
height of this wall is about 9 m above sea level. However, about 25 people died on the
Pondicherry promenade.
Most of the dead were fishermen living beyond the seawall boundary in hamlets such
as Kucchikupam, Ariyankuppam, Ponniyarpala, and Ganagachettikulam. Kucchikupam
experienced three waves that washed out thatch huts and killed 3 people, despite being
over 4 m above mean sea level. The buildings with masonry brick walls were damaged
but did not collapse. In Ganagachettikulam, a beach hamlet where 16 people had died,
within 10 days of the event people had started building their temporary houses on the
same plinth level as their earlier homes.
Figure 27. Arasalar Bridge—the two southern arches of this bridge collapsed in the tsunami,
but a temporary Bailey bridge was erected by the Indian army within six hours 共photo:
A. Sheth兲.

COAST OF ANDHRA PRADESH
The tsunami waves struck the Andhra Pradesh coast at about 9:05 A.M. The waves
destroyed homes and the livelihoods of fishermen and caused many kinds of secondary
damage, such as loss of fertile land and loss of employment. The most damaged districts
were Machhalipatanam 共Krishna兲, Ongole 共Prakasham兲, and Kavali 共Nellore兲, which had
a wave penetration of 0.2–1.0 km into the mainland, with an average wave height of
1.2–2.2 m. Srikakulam, Vishakhapatnam, Kakinada, and Yanam 共Pondicherry兲 showed
comparatively less damage.
Fishing and agriculture are the two dominant occupations in the villages along the
coastline in Andhra Pradesh. The tsunami washed away most of the fertile topsoil and
deposited heaps of sand, which ultimately left people with the choice of either changing
the land use or changing the crop pattern.
Srikakulam District
The villages of Kaviti, Iddivanipalem, Sompeta, Naupada, and Kalingapatanam re-
corded maximum damage in the Srikakulam district, which is famous for its beautiful
beaches. Because the shore is flat, the tsunami wave penetration was greater, and when
the waves receded, they took back piles of coconuts that had been stacked along the
coastline for shipping. All allied cottage industries based on coconuts, such as coir mak-
ing, basket making, and oil extraction centers, were out of business for the rest of the
season.
Northern Sompeta near Iddivanipalem is protected by a seawall made of huge con-
crete blocks approximately 1 m⫻1 m⫻1 m. This seawall did not show any major dam-
age from the tsunami except for dislocation of a few blocks at some locations.
The coastline along Barua, the southernmost area of the Sompeta district, is guarded
by sand dunes and sparse vegetation cover. Tsunami water failed to cross the ridge line
of the sand dunes but left a considerable amount of sandy soil eroded, exposing tree
roots.
Naupada, called the “salt bowl” of Andhra Pradesh, has an extensive network of salt
pans 共salt farms兲 spreading over 4,000 acres. Of these, 1,400 acres were badly silted up
in the tsunami. According to local salt farmers, the tsunami caused a loss of investment
of Rs. 2,000 per acre.
Kalingapatanam Beach did not suffer significant damage because of its peculiar
shape 共with two projecting arms forming a crescent兲, slope, and geology. The seabed at
Kalingapatanam is made of rocky strata. When the tsunami struck the coast, the projec-
tions protected the inner core area where settlements were, and the waves dispersed into
the empty but wide riverbed of Vanshdhara River, which empties into the Bay of Bengal
at Kalingapatanam. As a result, only a few fishing boats tied near the river mouth were
tossed, but the rest of the areas were unharmed.

Vishakhapatnam District
Vishakhapatnam is an important city of eastern India with a very busy harbor and
naval base. To protect and strengthen the coastline, concrete tetrapods have been laid
along the Vishakhapatnam coastline. It has three divisions: Vishakhapatnam Port Trust,
Vishakhapatnam Sea Port, and Vishakhapatnam Container Terminal. The latter two are
leased to private parties, and on 26 December their berths were empty. Vishakhapatnam
Port had minor damage that created difficulty in navigational movements, cargo loading,
and unloading. Fishing harbor boats and trawlers drifted away, a couple of which sank;
179 mechanized boats were partially damaged. Mooring buoys drifted away, and some
people fell into the water during this time but were rescued without injury. In all, the
port suffered one full day’s worth of operational loss.
The tsunami disrupted the fishing industry, as many fishermen lost their boats and
nets. Those with huts within 200 m of the coastline lost their homes. Moreover, the ru-
mor of fish being diseased or dying due to the tsunami ruined the sales of even the small
catch in the days immediately after tsunami and destroyed the fishing industry further.
East Godavari District
The East Godavari coastline suffered the least damage. The Kakinada Port Trust re-
ported some that disruption in activities had disorganized its functions. All the opera-
tions were partly suspended for one day. The port was saved due to its peculiar shape and
due to Hope Island, which acted as shield.
Because this is a delta area, water channels or in some cases backwaters are exten-
sively used to sail fishing boats right up to the edge of settlements. These channels
helped reduce the impact of tsunami water entering into the mainland. At Uppada vil-
lage, however, the stone pitching of the embankment was damaged in some places.
Yanam and West Godavari District
Yanam has rich, black fertile soil deposited by the Godavari River. Paddy cultivation,
high-quality brick manufacturing, ceramic tile molding, and fishing boat construction
are some of the main occupations in Yanam. After the tsunami devastation, the two cot-
tage industries of brick manufacturing and boat construction expanded rapidly.
The soil is deep friable, well-drained sandy loam in the West Godavari district
coastal belt. The land is a green mass of mangroves and a dense human-created forest of
cash crops such as cashews, jackfruit, and coffee grown in the shade of coconut farms.
The tsunami ruined the crops and replaced the standing cashew trees with sand deposits.
Fresh ingress of water was seen in areas with dense mangroves. Part of the mangrove
belt directly in the path of the tsunami waves was completely washed away, leaving an-
other part partially or fully submerged in water for more than 48 hours. Silt had accu-
mulated on the pneumatophores 共the breathing roots of mangroves兲, choking the respi-
ration of the mangroves.
The tsunami left the area prone to further erosion of soil on seashores after removal
of vegetation cover. Slowly growing species such as mangroves, even if replanted, will
take a long time to cover the entire land.

Krishna District
In the Krishna district, the tsumani created havoc in Manginapudi and on Machali-
pattanam Beach. A large number of people, especially fishing families, were displaced
as the tsunami wave swept the entire east coast. For the Hindus of Manginapudi Beach,
which is a village in Andhra Pradesh state on India’s southeast coast, it was an auspi-
cious occasion, a full moon day, and the women and children had stepped into the sea
for ritual bathing. Many of these bathers were washed away by the tsunami. The Krishna
district recorded a loss of 27 human lives. While the main village of Manginapudi did
not suffer tsunami damage, because it was at an elevation, the huts of the fishermen were
mostly destroyed. Boats were thrown by the tsunami waves just outside the village, and
many were lost. All the fishing nets were lost.
According to narratives of the local residents, the tsunami water came like a running
wall at Machalipattanam Beach. It pounded on existing structures such as refreshment
kiosks 共Figure 28兲, and it scoured the shallow foundations and washed beach vendors
away. The giant waves also left remains of dead deep-sea turtles and completely de-
stroyed a beach children’s park.
Prakasham District
Prakasham was the most affected district in Andhra Pradesh, recording 35 deaths.
Singraikonda, a beautiful beach hamlet, reported maximum damage in the Prakasham
district. This hamlet is nestled in a casuarina forest on a promontory, and, apart from
fishing, it survived on business from pearls and other sea products. Casuarina groves
were spread over a belt 450 m wide between the settlements and the sea. They served as
Figure 28. A damaged refreshment center on the beach at Machalipattanam, Andhra Pradesh
共photo: A. Jaiswal兲.

a buffer to reduce devastation, but as a result they suffered twisting 共Figure 29兲 and oc-
casionally uprooting. The grooves also prevented a freshwater lake from being mixed
with the sea. The whole village was dependent on this lake for drinking water. After the
tsunami, seawater made a new channel up to the lake and disturbed the freshwater bulb
permanently. The villagers are now dependent on water tankers for their potable water.
Settlements away from the casuarina shield and within 700 m of the coastline suf-
fered the most damage. Fishermen’s huts made of sun-dried adobe and mud-plastered
walls with thatched roofs were razed 共Figure 30兲.
Nellore District
Apart from the loss of livelihood, the fishermen-dominated shore areas faced the
problem of salinity as the tsunami polluted water sources. The aquatic sector received a
severe blow, because most of the catch had been washed away. Shrimp farming, or
aquaculture, was another hard-hit sector. Farmers lost their pumps, their cultivated lands,
and a running chain of production.
The beach showed a very distinct form of ground failure. A part of the beach sank by
45–80 cm, with a continuous cutting edge parallel to the coastline. The village’s tar-
road approach, which was parallel to the seashore, was completely washed away, expos-
ing compact murrum at the base.
Figure 29. Casuarina trees tilted in the direction of the onslaught of the tsunami waves in Sin-
graikonda 共photo: A. Jaiswal兲.

PERFORMANCE OF STRUCTURES
HOUSING
There were two types of damage: damage induced by direct pressure from tsunami
waves, and scouring damage induced by the receding waves. Many of the affected struc-
tures consisted of houses belonging to the fishing community. The houses were nonengi-
neered structures having the following features:
• Load-bearing brick masonry walls and tiled roofs
• Load-bearing brick masonry walls and thatched roofs
• Load-bearing brick 共or concrete block兲 masonry walls and RC roof slabs; these were
not very common.
• Thatch walls and thatched roofs; these constituted shacks.
Most of the affected homes were 4–100 m from the sea, except in areas such as
Nagapattinam and Akkaraipettai, where the effect on houses was felt up to 500 m away.
The masonry work was generally poor, with little binding mortar. The foundations in
Kerala, which has good sandy soil at low depths, were shallow, usually about
0.6–0.75 m deep. In such houses, failure was initiated by scouring of the foundations,
Figure 30. Fishermen’s huts of adobe and mud plaster walls were razed at Prakasham 共photo:
A. Jaiswal兲.

which triggered collapse of the walls and subsequent failure 共Figure 8兲. However, ma-
sonry structures with RC roofs and better integrity performed well even when on the
shore 共Figure 9兲, although they too suffered foundation scouring.
In areas with deeper foundations such as the delta region of Tamil Nadu and some
parts of Kerala, the masonry superstructure failed first, due to the impact of the tsunami
waves. Lack of integrity in the structure 共e.g., the lack of continuous bands or corner
strengthening measures兲, coupled with poor construction quality, made the corners of
the houses most vulnerable, and failures initiated at this location 共Figures 31 and 32兲.
Thatch houses suffered maximum damage.
The height of the waves and of the inundation recorded in Kerala were much lower
than in Tamil Nadu. This, coupled with a wealthier population having invested more re-
sources in housing construction, could be the possible reason that, even though the num-
ber of villages affected in Kerala was about half of the number affected in Tamil Nadu,
the loss of dwellings was just about 15% of the loss in Tamil Nadu.
SEAWALLS
Kerala has a seawall along large parts of its coast. The seawall is made of loose
rubble and is about 0.75–1 m high. Stones were dislodged at some locations, and boul-
ders were thrown as far as 30 m away. Similar observations were made at the Andhra
Pradesh coastline. The seawall reduced the effect of the tsunami waves, and it was seen
that the areas in Kerala and Andhra Pradesh that did not have a seawall were the most
Figure 31. In areas with deeper foundations, masonry superstructures failed first 共photo: A.
Sheth兲.

affected. However, while no incidents of persons being injured by displaced rubble have
been recorded, this could be a hazard in future events, and the states may consider the
use of gabions or similar systems to contain the rubble. Tamil Nadu has a seawall in
restricted areas. The city of Pondicherry was fully protected by its seawall. However, the
wall constructed to protect the Arasalar River in Karaikal was washed away.
WATERWAYS, ROADS, BRIDGES,AND RAILWAYS
Major damage to the transportation infrastructure was observed in the states of
Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and Pondicherry 共Table 4兲. The only damage in Andhra Pradesh was
minor scouring and erosion of the top coat on some metalled beach roads.
Kerala
The backwaters are an important means of transport in Kerala. Due to large sand
deposits by the tsunami, the available draft was reduced in these backwaters; this af-
fected ferry movement, and dredging was required.
About 60 km of major district roads and some village roads along the coastline in
the districts of Allapuzha and neighboring Kollam were badly damaged, primarily be-
cause of scouring that washed out the shoulders of roads and eroded the top layer of
pavements. The tsunami also deposited large volumes of sand and other debris, which
blocked the roads.
Figure 32. The lack of structural integrity caused failures to trigger at the corners of structures
共photo: A. Sheth兲.

Tamil Nadu
Tamil Nadu was the worst affected in terms of damage to the transport sector. The
district of Kanyakumari on the west coast and the districts of Nagapattinam and Cudda-
lore on the east coast experienced damage to about 80 km of the major and other district
roads. As in Kerala, the damage was primarily due to the scouring action of the waves.
Tamil Nadu suffered severe damage to two bridges. As mentioned elsewhere in this
paper, a 160-m-long bridge had been commissioned in 2002 to connect the villages of
Melamanakudi and Kelamanakudi on opposite banks of the Pazhyar River. The bridge
went missing after the tsunami. Another bridge at Akkaraipettai in the Nagapattinam dis-
trict was affected by the large boats that broke their moorings in the tsunami and dashed
against the bridge 共Figure 33兲. Two bridges under construction were reportedly damaged
but were not inspected.
As mentioned elsewhere in this paper, the rail link to Nagore in the Nagapattinam
district was cut off as a 7-km meter-gauge track between Nagapattinam and Nagore was
completely damaged.
Cuddalore district suffered a major loss of roads along the beach, especially at Silver
Beach, where a newly constructed road was completely destroyed. Eight rail cars were
reported to be damaged in Cuddalore.
Figure 33. Large boats broke their moorings and damaged a bridge at Akkaraipettai 共photo: A.
Sheth兲.

Pondicherry
There was damage to about 2 km of beach road in Karaikal and 3 km of road be-
tween Karaikal and the beach. In Karaikal, about 4.5 km of the road between Var-
ichikudi and the beach was washed away.
Two small bridges at Solai Nagar 共Pondicherry兲 were also damaged. The arch bridge
on the Arasalar River in Karaikal had six arches, with a total length of 46 m. One of the
piers of the bridge gave way, causing damage and settlement of the adjacent arches. The
Indian Army restored this bridge by providing a Bailey bridge across the river.
PORTS
No major ports in mainland India were significantly damaged. However, many inter-
mediate and minor ports were affected.
Kerala
Four minor ports 共Vizhinjam, Neendakara, Beypore, and Azhikkal兲 and eight fishing
harbors in Kerala were affected due to huge sand deposits by the tsunami; these deposits
reduced the available draft.
Tamil Nadu
Kolachel Port in the Kanyakumari district required dredging and repairs to the jet-
ties. The port of Nagapattinam is situated at the mouth of the Kaduvayar River in the
Bay of Bengal. It is a prominent port in the Nagapattinam district and is classified as an
intermediate port. The port of Nagapattinam is situated on the western bank of the
Kaduvayar River, which flows parallel to the coast in a northerly direction for about
0.8 km and debouches into the bay. This stretch was protected from the sea by a narrow
sand spit. A rubble-mound breakwater was also constructed near the pier to increase the
depth. About 100 m from the shoreline is a concrete groin about 1 m high, which was
damaged in the tsunami. Boats used to be moored beyond this wall along mooring dol-
phins. The tsunami waves went over and across the breakwaters, the seawall, and into the
backwaters. Boats broke free of moorings and struck the bridge. The damage to the
groin caused silting and reduction in the draft, and this made the port unserviceable.
The port of Chennai, the most important port in south India, did not suffer signifi-
cant damage, although it experienced some amount of scouring and silting. Concrete tet-
rapods forming the breakwaters were dislodged in some places. A ship 共the Keshava兲
broke away from its moorings and collided with two other ships. Two mooring dolphins
were lost on the Ambedkar dock, which also showed damage in the form of cracks. Cud-
dalore Port also suffered damage to breakwaters and the seawall and required dredging.
Pondicherry Port and five fishing harbors 共Pazhavar, Thirumullai Vasal, Chinnangudi,
and Nagore in Nagapattinam, and Chinnamuttom in Kanyakumari兲 required dredging
and repairs to walls and docks.

BOATS AND FISHING INDUSTRY
The greatest damage was suffered by the fishing industry. A large number of boats
were damaged or lost 共Table 5兲. A large part of the coastal population depends on fishing
and other allied industries for its livelihood. Most of the fishermen in affected areas lost
fishing nets. For some time after the tsunami, the fishermen were advised to avoid fish-
ing until the sea had stabilized. The few fish that were caught did not find buyers, be-
cause there was fear that the fish had become poisoned.
CONCLUSIONS AND OBSERVATIONS
The tsunami effects varied greatly across different parts of the coast according to the
number of waves experienced, the inundation distance and height of waves, and the den-
sity of the area, as well as topological and geographical features that made some areas
more vulnerable than others. Besides these factors, the number of lives lost was influ-
enced by exposure to previous disasters and the local disaster management capability.
Most of the people killed were members of the fishing community and, in some cases
such as Marina Beach at Chennai and Velankanni in Nagapattinam, they were visitors on
the beach.
The tsunami caused much damage to the housing stock along the coast and to
bridges and roads. The houses were mainly nonengineered and were poorly constructed.
But improving the construction methodology and the integrity of structures cannot pro-
vide the necessary assurance of tsunami resistance. If people continue to build along the
Table 4. Cost of damage to the transport sector in three states*
Transport sector
State
Total
Tamil Nadu Pondicherry Kerala
Roads and bridges 共Rs. crores兲 27.66 24.45 6.14 58.25
Ports and fishing harbors 共Rs. crores兲 65.41 5.00 24.24 94.65
Total 共Rs. crores兲 93.07 29.45 30.38 152.90
Total 共US$ millions兲 21.40 6.77 6.98 35.15
*
Source: ADB et al. 共2005兲
Table 5. Lost or damaged boats in the four affected states*
Effect
State
Kerala Tamil Nadu Pondicherry Andhra Pradesh
Boats lost or
damaged
10,065 45,920 6,678 1,362
*
Source: ADB et al. 共2005兲

shore on flat land, they will continue to be highly vulnerable in a tsunami and may ex-
pect such damage and loss of life. Although the government has considered rigorous
implementation of the CRZ 共which requires structures to be a minimum distance of
500 m from the shoreline兲 in the reconstruction project, it is a moot point whether this
requirement will be followed. It is quite likely that fishermen will move back to the
beaches in a few years.
In such a case, a robust tsunami warning system along the lines of the cyclone warn-
ing system must be put in place, and tsunami shelters 共which may also double as cyclone
shelters兲 must be provided in every coastal area for quick and safe egress of people and
their valuables.
Bridges need special attention. It may be worthwhile for the government to consider
providing restraints for bridges in light of the failure of the bridge at Melamanakudi over
the Pazhyar River. There is also a need to review the existing bridges and evaluate their
serviceability, in light of the failure of the Arasalar Bridge.
Damage was caused at many ports due to damaged mooring dolphins. Special atten-
tion needs to be paid to the design of the moorings.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This reconnaissance survey was made possible by the financial support from the De-
partment of Science and Technology, Government of India, New Delhi; the authors
gratefully acknowledge this support. Numerous individuals and agencies 共from the gov-
ernment, NGOs, and the private sector兲 provided critical help during the post-earthquake
field investigations; the authors gratefully acknowledge this help. The authors would like
to make special mention of Professors Sudhir Jain, C. V. R. Murty, and Durgesh Rai of
the Indian Institute of Technology at Kanpur for reviewing the paper and providing ad-
ditional information. We also gratefully acknowledge the logistics and local support pro-
vided by Mr. G. B. Menon, who accompanied us to Kerala and Tamil Nadu.
REFERENCES
Asian Development Bank 共ADB兲, United Nations, and World Bank, 2005. India—Post-
Tsunami Recovery Program—Preliminary Damage and Needs Assessment, March 8. http://
www.undp.org/bcpr/disred/documents/tsunami/india/reports/dnassessment.pdf
Bilham, R., Engdahl, R., Feldl, N., and Satyabala, S. P., 2005. Partial and complete rupture of
the Indo-Andaman plate boundary 1847–2004, Seismol. Res. Lett. Draft, March 4.
http://cires.colorado.edu/~bilham/IndonesiAndaman2004_files/AndamanSRL4Mar.pdf
Government of Pondicherry, Office of the Secretary 共Revenue兲 and Collector, 2005. Damages
caused by tsunami on 26-12-2004—Report in respect of UT of Pondicherry, March 9. http://
pondicherry.nic.in/tsunami/dmg1002.htm
Gupta, I. D., 1995. Seismicity and Tectonics—Selected Topics in Seismic Hazard Analysis, Uni-
versity of Southern California, Department of Civil Engineering, Report No. 95-08.
Jain, S. K., Murty, C. V. R., Rai, D. C., Malik, J. N., Sheth, A. R., and Jaiswal, A., 2005. Effects
of M 9 Sumatra earthquake and tsunami of 26 December 2004, Curr. Sci. 88 共3兲, 357–359.

Ministry of Home Affairs 共MHA兲, NDM Division. Situation reports. www.ndmindia.nic.in/
tsunami2004/sitrep31.htm
Murty, T., 2005. Tsunami warning system in India by 2007, The Rediff Interview, September
29. http://in.rediff.com/news/2005/sep/29inter1.htm
Murty, T. S., and Rafiq, M., 1991. A tentative list of tsunamis in the marginal seas of the North
Indian Ocean, Natural Hazards 4, 81–83.
National Institute of Oceanography 共NIO兲. Tidal data. www.nio.org/jsp/tsunami.jsp
Rao, V. B., and Murty, B.V.R.S., 1970. Earthquakes and tectonics in peninsular India, J. Indian
Geophys. Union 7, 1–8.
Reddy, P. R., and Chandrakala, K., 2004. Seismicity in and around Ongole—An appraisal, J.
Indian Geophys. Union 8 共2兲, 143–146.
Tamil Nadu Industrial Development Corporation 共TIDCO兲. http://tidco.com/tn_policies/tn_
infra_structure/nagapattinam.asp
共Received 13 February 2006; accepted 3 May 2006兲

Effects of 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami on Mainland India

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Effects of 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami on Mainland India

Similar to Effects of 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami on Mainland India (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Effects of 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami on Mainland India